IBDQ vs VTI
iShares iBonds Dec 2025 Term Corporate ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Quick Verdict
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI delivered stronger 1-year returns. VTI offers more diversification with 3,543 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IBDQ | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.10% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $2.3B | $666.9B | |
| Dividend Yield | 3.75% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 21 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | +3.79% | +13.14% | |
| 1Y Return | +4.01% | +22.35% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +4.57% | +21.83% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +1.36% | +12.01% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 4.1% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -15.2% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Mar 11, 2015 | May 24, 2001 |
IBDQ vs VTI Performance
iShares iBonds Dec 2025 Term Corporate ETF (IBDQ) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year IBDQ returned +4.01% while VTI returned +22.35%. Year to date, IBDQ is up 3.79% versus a gain of 13.14% for VTI.
Over three years, IBDQ compounded at +4.57% per year against +21.83% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +1.36% and +12.01% respectively. Across the full 11-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +8.09% annualized vs +3.29%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VTI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.3% compared with 4.1% for IBDQ. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -15.2% for IBDQ and -56.6% for VTI. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.48. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IBDQ charges 0.10% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $10 vs $3 annually, a gap of $7 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IBDQ currently yields 3.75% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
IBDQ and VTI share 0 holdings out of 2807 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IBDQ or VTI?
IBDQ has an expense ratio of 0.10% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $7 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IBDQ or VTI?
Over the past year IBDQ returned +4.01% vs +22.35% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (11 years), IBDQ annualized +3.29% vs +8.09% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IBDQ or VTI?
VTI has been the more volatile fund at 15.3% annualized versus 4.1% for IBDQ. Worst drawdown: IBDQ -15.2% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both IBDQ and VTI?
IBDQ and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.48, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IBDQ and VTI?
IBDQ and VTI share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 2807 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IBDQ or VTI?
IBDQ yields 3.75% while VTI yields 1.07%, so IBDQ currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.